1910.] CUTAXEOUS SCEXT-GLANUS OF RUMIXAXTS. 1)69 



than as an interesting speculation ; and his conclusions are open 

 to the criticism of being based upon premises which cannot, on 

 the evidence, be accepted as firmly established. 



Looking at the antlers of an adult Red Deer, Wapiti, Bara- 

 .singha, Thameng, or Japanese Deer, it seems absurd to claim 

 that the " brow-tine " is equivalent to the so-called " beam "' 

 which constitutes the rest of the antler. It appears merely to 

 be the lowest of the series of bi'anches which arise from the beam 

 and to be comparable to those that are above it. The accepted 

 terminology of the tines bears out this interpretation. I believe, 

 nevertheless, that the " brow-tine " and the " beam " are respec- 

 tively the anterior and posterior branches of an originally sub- 

 equall}^ biramous or dichotomous aiitler, like that, for instance, 

 of the Guemal [Ilippocamelus), and that their real equivalence in 

 the Deer above-named is obscured by the immense development 

 and complex armature of the posterior branch. It is this growth 

 of the posterior branch at the expense of the anterior which 

 characterises the antlers of most of the Deer of the Old World. 

 A marked appi'oach to this inequality is seen in the Reindeer, 

 but in this genus the fundamental equivalence between the two 

 branches is moi'e apparent. Limitations to the growth of the 

 interior branch are imposed probably by necessities of feeding. 

 If the anterior branch projected be3'ond the muzzle, a Stag could 

 not feed with freedom oft" the ground ; and even if it were pi*o- 

 longed obliquely upwards over the face, it would be a hindrance 

 to browsing. No such limitations exist in the case of the posterior 

 branch. 



Support for the hypothesis that the antlers of the so-called 

 Elaphine group were originally biramous like those of the 

 Guemal {Hijyjjo^^amelus), and that the biramous antler was pre- 

 ceded in evolutionary development by an unbranched antler 

 such as is retained in Mazania^ is supplied by the annual growth 

 of an individual antler. The antler first appears as an undivided 

 bud corresponding, I conceive, to the unbranched antler of 

 Mazama. This bud then gives off an anterior and a posteiior 

 branch. For a longer or a shorter time these grow with equal 

 rapidity, forming a biramous antler which in species with the 

 anterior biunch inclined upwards, as in the Axis, Sandiar, or 

 Japanese Deer, is shaped like a short-stalked Y? resembling, in 

 fact, the permanent antler of the adult Guemal {Ilipjmcainelas). 



These stages are not equally evident in all Stags. In Cervus 

 itself, for example, the early appearance of the '' bez "-tine makes 

 the biramous appearance of very short dui-ation ; but in the 

 Thameng or Panolia Deer (C. eldi) the anterior and posterior 

 branches grow at the same lute until the anterior branch has 

 reached nearly its full size. Thereafter the posterior branch 

 rapidly surpasses it and, increasing in length, develops its supple- 

 mentaiy tines. 



If this view of the fundamental resemblance undei'lying 

 the antlers of all Deer be correct, it minimises the difiiculty of 



